News & Insights

Federal projects do not always stall because the solution is missing. Often, the obstacle is finding a viable path to fund, contract, or deliver it.

When appropriated funds are unavailable, timelines are compressed, or the Federal Acquisition Regulation does not fit the requirement, non-FAR authorities can provide another way forward.

Salas O’Brien’s guide compares three options available to federal agencies: Other Transaction Authority, Enhanced Use Leases, and Intergovernmental Support Agreements. It explains when each authority works best, how funding and partners differ, where programs commonly break down, and how leaders can select a defensible path from requirement to execution.

Download in PDF

Contributors

Harry Kleiser, PE, Hillary Bassett, John Broughton, Jon Vernau, Debra Edwards

A practical guide to moving stalled projects forward when appropriated funds, timelines, or the FAR itself are the constraint

When funding or the FAR is the constraint

Federal projects don’t fail for lack of a solution. They stall for lack of a path to fund or contract it — which is exactly what non-FAR authorities were built to fix.

The Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) is the default path for acquiring products and services with appropriated funds, and for most requirements, it works. But programs stall for reasons the FAR isn’t built to solve quickly, usually a decision changed, or the funding fell through.

Agencies keep asking the same questions: How do we move at the speed of business? Deliver quality facilities for less? Advance a requirement when the appropriation isn’t there, or the solution isn’t yet defined?
Non-FAR authorities exist for exactly these situations. They open access to alternative funding and to public–private and intergovernmental partnerships, while still carrying real oversight and the obligation to meet the requirements.

This guide compares three: Other Transaction Authority (OTA), Enhanced Use Lease (EUL), and Intergovernmental Support Agreement (IGSA); what each does best, where each breaks down, and how to choose.

How to choose what drives the decision

What drives the decision

Speed and defensibility dominate. Agencies want to move a requirement forward without waiting on an appropriation cycle, and they need a decision that holds up through oversight and audit. The authorities that win pair traditional funding with a genuinely interested partner — private capital, a developer, or a peer government — so the project advances on its own merits rather than its budget line.

Where programs break down

Most failures are commercial and procedural, not legal. EULs stall when assets are marketed at inflated fair-market value and no developer engages. OTAs slow down when internal stakeholder alignment lags, even though the authority itself is fast. IGSAs underdeliver when partners are matched without verifying real shared requirements or utilization. And across all three, deferring the choice of authority until late in planning shrinks the options that remain.

What works in practice

Successful programs treat the authority as a strategy, not a form. They define the requirement precisely, test the market before committing to terms, build stakeholder alignment early, and structure agreements so the partner’s incentives match the government’s. Done this way, a non-FAR tool brings creativity, speed, and potentially outside investment to problems the FAR process alone would leave below the cut line.

Download in PDF

Why Salas O’Brien for non-FAR procurement?

Choosing the authority is the easy part. Closing it is where most efforts stall — in market engagement, transaction structuring, valuation, stakeholder alignment, and the discipline to keep the requirement met while the funding gets creative.

Salas O’Brien can walk you through from start to finish.

Because we see needs repeat from base to base and region to region, we bring an enterprise view of the universal challenges, and we treat every authority as a creative way to solve it.

We work alongside our clients to make sound, defensible decisions backed by data-driven business-case analysis, market due diligence, and executable strategies — marrying the funding Congress provides with partners in private industry and other governments who have a real stake in the outcome.

The result is quality facilities, delivered faster, at lower cost on projects that would otherwise remain stalled.

Want to discuss your project? Reach out to [email protected].